DOCSLIB.ORG

TREE BOARD Milwaukie Tree Board | 6101 SE Johnson Creek Blvd, Milwaukie, OR 97206

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TREE BOARD Milwaukie Tree Board | 6101 SE Johnson Creek Blvd, Milwaukie, OR 97206 REVISED TREE BOARD Milwaukie Tree Board | 6101 SE Johnson Creek Blvd, Milwaukie, OR 97206 Members Andrew Taylor, Ley Garnett, Ann Leenstra, Linda Carr, Rebecca Ives, Kathleen Brennan- Hunter, Gina Dake Staff Liaison: Peter Passarelli AGENDA: November 14, 2018 | 5:30 – 7 PM | Community Development Conference Room 5:30 – 5:40 Welcome/Review minutes from October meeting All 5:40 – 6:20 Tree Code and Development All 6:20 – 6:40 Urban Forest Plan Update All 6:40 – 7:00 Tree list Becky 7:00 Adjourn TREE BOARD MEETING MINUTES 6101 SE Johnson Creek Blvd. Milwaukie, OR 97206 October 17, 2018 Members Present: Andrew Taylor Ley Garnett Linda Carr Rebecca Ives Gina Dake Kathleen Brennan-Hunter Ann Leenstra Members Absent: None Staff Present: Peter Passarelli, City of Milwaukie Guests: Emma Sagor – EnviroIssues Jon Brown – citizen of Milwaukie MEETING NOTES DRAFT Minutes from the August 15, 2018, meeting were approved. Peter mentioned that the survey produced important information. Emma Sagor, from EnviroIssues, discussed the results. It drew a lot of open ended comments. There was a total of 204 responses, and 148 of them were completed. The Board next discussed status of the Urban Forest Plan. Peter said the City Attorney advised breaking the Tree Code into 3 broad segments: public trees, private trees and development related activities affecting trees. Peter noted that all materials related to the November 20, 2018, Council work session involving the Urban Forest Plan are due for review on November 8. Tree Board Minutes – October 17, 2018 Page 2 The Board decided to move up the November meeting to the 14th. Friends of Trees want to have a Spring event in Milwaukie. It might be a joint Arbor Day event. Peter said the City has a $15,000 budget to buy trees for planting. The areas where the trees will be planted are yet to be selected but need to be soon. Tree Code workshops with Board members and Planning will be held in the next few weeks. Jon Brown, citizen of Milwaukie and guest at the meeting, made some comments regarding public outreach, and mentioned that there is always opposition to tree protection. Next meeting: November 14, 2018. Adjourned at 7:00 pm. Andy Taylor, Chair Peter Passarelli, City Liaison DRAFT Trees and Development, proposed new code outline, September 2018 Tree Preservation During Land Divisions: MMC Title 17 – Land Division • New code section (perhaps 17.36), applies to all land divisions including flag lots. o Minimum Preservation Standards: for instance, preserve 50% of trees with diameter (DBH) 20” or greater, and at least 30% of total tree diameter on the site . For lots greater than one acre, make it less burdensome to calculate: for instance, simply preserve at least 35% of total tree canopy area on the site. Applies to any land division with at least one tree 6” DBH or greater . There are tree exemptions, such as trees that are less than 6” DBH, dead, diseased, invasive species, or in the public right-of-way. o Approval Criteria: for instance, trees proposed for preservation are suitable based on their location (clustered in groves preferred), health, long-term viability, and anticipated development impact; tree preservation is maximized while allowing reasonable development; and mitigation where minimum standards are not met, including new planting and preserving smaller (<6” DBH) trees. o Modifications to better preserve trees: allowing cottage clustering in low-density zoning, and allowing reduction of number of units. Tree Preservation During Development: MMC Title 16.32 – Tree Code, or MMC 19.500 – Supplementary Development Regulations • Tree Preservation Standards, applies to all trees on sites where development impacts a minimum area (i.e. 100 square feet), and to all trees in public right-of-ways where development impacts more than just existing paved surfaces. o Preservation: For instance, preserve and protect at least 33% of all trees with DBH 12” or greater. Offer option for preservation of Priority Species (natives) 6-12” to satisfy 33%. o Mitigation: Fee is paid to Tree Fund for every tree below Preservation threshold (i.e. 33%); fee is based on size of tree, larger trees are more expensive fees. o Large Trees: For instance, all trees greater than 30” DBH shall be preserved, or mitigation must be paid. They may be used to meet the 33% for Preservation above. o Exemptions: Sites that are too small (i.e. <5000 sq. ft.); trees that are dead, diseased, or invasive species; consider exemption from mitigation fees for affordable housing projects. • On-Site Tree Area and Density Standards, applies to all new development and exterior remodels exceeding a value threshold o Required Tree Area: Percentage of site area, based on zoning (i.e. 50% of site for low density residential). Percentage of lot for planting trees o Required Tree Density: Number of required trees , based on Tree Area size. Target density can be reached with more small trees or fewer large trees. Tree size category calculator to be provided. o Exemptions: Specific land uses (i.e. agriculture); projects relating to septic, plumbing, demolition. • Street Tree Planting Standards, applies to all development affecting right-of-ways, including public and private. o Tree Planting Requirement: 1 tree per X amount linear feet of street frontage, based on tree species/size. For example, 1 large tree every 35 feet; 1 small tree every 25 feet. o Existing trees preserved to meet Preservation Standards can be used to meet Planting Requirements. o Mitigation: for public projects, trees can be planted elsewhere to mitigate when standards cannot be met. o Exemptions: Development projects that don’t exceed a value threshold, only affect the street surface, and demolition; and where utilities make tree planting impossible; where the planting strip is too narrow and tree wells are not feasible. • Tree Documentation, required alongside all development permits, unless there are no trees >=12” DBH on site and no street/public trees >=3” DBH. o A site plan, must show: . Existing locations of all trees, including all trees on site 12” DBH (and smaller trees, if being used to meet preservation standards), all street/public trees 3” DBH, Heritage trees are specifically labelled . Existing improvements . Proposed improvements . Proposed tree activity, including trees preserved and protected during construction to meet standards, trees to be removed, and trees to be planted to meet required tree density. o If not using prescribed tree protection measures, developer must include a description of those alternative tree protection measures for trees to be preserved through development. o Trees to be excluded from preservation standards based on poor health/invasive species require documentation from an arborist. • Review and Appeals processes, specifying a timeframe for the review process, and how the administrative decision could be appealed. Undeveloped 2-1/2 to 3' Planting Strip - 2-1/2 to 3' Planting Strip - 3 to 3-1/2' Planting Strip - 3 to 3-1/2' Planting Strip - 4 to 5-1/2' Planting Strip - 4 to 5-1/2' Planting Strip - 6 to 8' Planting Strip - Roadside BOTANICAL MATURE SIZE COMMON CONCERN Overhead Power Lines No Overhead Power Lines Overhead Power Lines No Overhead Power Lines Overhead Power Lines No Overhead Power Lines Overhead Power Lines Planting Strip Downtown Abies amabilis 80't Silver Fir X Abies balsamea 'Nana' Dwarf Balsam Fir Not pollution tolerant X X X X X X Abies concolor White Fir Disease prone? X Abies grandis 100+'t x 35'w Grand Fir X Abies pinsapo Spanish Fir Not pollution tolerant X Acer buergeranum 35't x 30'w Trident Maple X X Acer campestre Hedge Maple Specie - invasive (var?) X Acer campestre 'Evelyn' Queen Elizabeth Maple Shallow roots? X Acer circinatum 20't x 20'w Vine Maple X X X X X X Acer ginnala Amur maple Invasive specie X Acer grandidentatum 'Schmidt' Rocky Mountain Glow Maple Univ.Minn.report X X X Acer griseum 30't x 25'w Paperbark Maple X X X Acer macrophyllum 100't x 50'w Bigleaf Maple X Acer p. 'Bloodgood' 20't x 20'w Blood Good Japanese Maple X X X X X X X Acer p. 'Butterfly' 12't x 8'w Butterfly Japanese Maple X X X X X X X Acer platanoides 'Crimson sentry' Crimson Sentry Norway Maple Invasive X X Acer platanoides 'Drummondi' Variegated Norway Maple Heavily planted X Acer platanoides 'Globosum' Globe Norway Maple Invasive X Acer rubrum Red Maple Destructive roots X Acer tataricum ssp. Ginnala Amur Maple Invasive X X X X X X Acer truncatum x A. platanoides 'Warrenred' Pacific Sunset Maple Short-lived? X Alnus rubra Red Alder Collar rot if irrigated X Amelanchier alnifolia var semi-integrifolia 12't x 12'w Serviceberry X X X X X X Amelanchier laevis 'Snowcloud' Snowcloud Serviceberry X X Amelanchier x grandiflora 'Autumn Brilliance' 25't x 25'w Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry X Arbutus menziesii 60't x 30'w Madrone X Arbutus unedo Strawberry Tree Messy X X X X X X Calocedrus decurrens 75't x 15'w California Incense Cedar X X Carpinus betulus 50't x 50'w European Hornbeam X Carpinus betulus 'Frans Fontaine' 35't x 15'w Frans Fontaine Hornbeam X Carpinus japonica 30't x 15'w Japanese Hornbeam X Ceanothus thyrsiflorus (specific varieties) California Lilac X X X X X X Cedrus deodara 50't x 40'w Deodar Cedar X Cedrus libani ssp. 'Atlantica Glauca' 60't x 40'w Blue Atlas Cedar X Cercidiphyllum japonicum Katsura Destructive roots X Chamaecyparis nootkatensis 45't x 25'w Alaska Cedar X Chamaecyparis pis. 'Filiferi Aurea' 15't x 10'w Chamaecyparis X X X X X X Chimonanthus praecox 15't x 12'w Fragrant Wintersweet X X X X X Chionanthus virginicus 15't x 12'w Fringetree X X X X X X Cistus x corbariensis 3't x 5'w Rock Rose X X X X X X Cornus mas 25't x 20'w Cornelian Cherry Dogwood X Corylopsis spicata 8't x 10'w Spike Winterhazel X X X X X X Crataegus douglasii (C.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Global Survey of Ex Situ Betulaceae Collections Global Survey of Ex Situ Betulaceae Collections
    Global Survey of Ex situ Betulaceae Collections Global Survey of Ex situ Betulaceae Collections By Emily Beech, Kirsty Shaw and Meirion Jones June 2015 Recommended citation: Beech, E., Shaw, K., & Jones, M. 2015. Global Survey of Ex situ Betulaceae Collections. BGCI. Acknowledgements BGCI gratefully acknowledges the many botanic gardens around the world that have contributed data to this survey (a full list of contributing gardens is provided in Annex 2). BGCI would also like to acknowledge the assistance of the following organisations in the promotion of the survey and the collection of data, including the Royal Botanic Gardens Edinburgh, Yorkshire Arboretum, University of Liverpool Ness Botanic Gardens, and Stone Lane Gardens & Arboretum (U.K.), and the Morton Arboretum (U.S.A). We would also like to thank contributors to The Red List of Betulaceae, which was a precursor to this ex situ survey. BOTANIC GARDENS CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL (BGCI) BGCI is a membership organization linking botanic gardens is over 100 countries in a shared commitment to biodiversity conservation, sustainable use and environmental education. BGCI aims to mobilize botanic gardens and work with partners to secure plant diversity for the well-being of people and the planet. BGCI provides the Secretariat for the IUCN/SSC Global Tree Specialist Group. www.bgci.org FAUNA & FLORA INTERNATIONAL (FFI) FFI, founded in 1903 and the world’s oldest international conservation organization, acts to conserve threatened species and ecosystems worldwide, choosing solutions that are sustainable, based on sound science and take account of human needs. www.fauna-flora.org GLOBAL TREES CAMPAIGN (GTC) GTC is undertaken through a partnership between BGCI and FFI, working with a wide range of other organisations around the world, to save the world’s most threated trees and the habitats which they grow through the provision of information, delivery of conservation action and support for sustainable use.
    [Show full text]
  • Topographic Patterns in the Phylogenetic Structure of Temperate Forests on Steep Mountainous Terrain
    Research Article Topographic patterns in the phylogenetic structure of temperate forests on steep mountainous terrain Ryo Kitagawa1*, Makiko Mimura2, Akira S. Mori3 and Akiko Sakai3 1 Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute, 1 Matsunosato, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8687, Japan 2 Department of BioEnvironmental Sciences, Tamagawa University, 6-1-1 Tamagawa gakuen, Machida, Tokyo 194-8610, Japan 3 Environment and Information Sciences, Yokohama National University, 79-1 Tokiwadai, Hodogaya Ward, Yokohama 240-8501, Japan Received: 30 March 2015; Accepted: 20 October 2015; Published: 24 November 2015 Associate Editor: Keping Ma Citation: Kitagawa R, Mimura M, Mori AS, Sakai A. 2015. Topographic patterns in the phylogenetic structure of temperate forests on steep mountainous terrain. AoB PLANTS 7: plv134; doi:10.1093/aobpla/plv134 Abstract. In rugged terrain subject to active geomorphological processes, the species composition of forest com- munities changes along topographic gradients over short distances. However, the phylogenetic structure of forests on rugged terrain has rarely been examined. Understanding such structures provides insight into community assembly rules dependent on local environmental conditions. To this end, we tested the topographic trends of measurements of phylogenetic community structure [net relatedness index (NRI) and nearest taxon index] in a catchment covered by temperate forests with complex relief in Japan. We found that phylogenetic structure changed from over-dispersion to clustering with increasing slope inclination, change of slope aspect from south to north and decreasing soil depth. This result suggested that environmental filtering tended to restrict community composition at relatively stressful sites, whereas species interaction functioned more strongly at relatively stress-free sites. Relatively stressful sites were char- acterized by early-successional species that tended to assemble in certain phylogenetic clades, whereas highly com- petitive late-successional species associated with lower NRI at relatively stress-free sites.
    [Show full text]
  • A Legacy of Plants N His Short Life, Douglas Created a Tremendous Legacy in the Plants That He Intro­ (P Coulteri) Pines
    The American lIorHcullural Sociely inviles you Io Celehrate tbe American Gardener al our 1999 Annual Conference Roston" Massachusetts June 9 - June 12~ 1999 Celebrate Ute accompHsbenls of American gardeners in Ute hlsloric "Cay Upon lhe 1Iill." Join wah avid gardeners from. across Ute counlrg lo learn new ideas for gardening excellence. Attend informa-Hve ledures and demonslraHons by naHonally-known garden experts. Tour lhe greal public and privale gardens in and around Roslon, including Ute Arnold Arborelum and Garden in Ute Woods. Meet lhe winners of AIlS's 1999 naHonJ awards for excellence in horHcullure. @ tor more informaHon, call1he conference regislrar al (800) 777-7931 ext 10. co n t e n t s Volume 78, Number 1 • '.I " Commentary 4 Hellebores 22 Members' Forum 5 by C. Colston Burrell Staghorn fern) ethical plant collecting) orchids. These early-blooming pennnials are riding the crest of a wave ofpopularity) and hybridizers are News from AHS 7 busy working to meet the demand. Oklahoma Horticultural Society) Richard Lighty) Robert E. Lyons) Grecian foxglove. David Douglas 30 by Susan Davis Price Focus 9 Many familiar plants in cultivation today New plants for 1999. are improved selections of North American species Offshoots 14 found by this 19th-century Scottish expLorer. Waiting for spring in Vermont. Bold Plants 37 Gardeners Information Service 15 by Pam Baggett Houseplants) transplanting a ginkgo tree) Incorporating a few plants with height) imposing starting trees from seed) propagating grape vines. foliage) or striking blossoms can make a dramatic difference in any landscape design. Mail-Order Explorer 16 Heirloom flowers and vegetables.
    [Show full text]
  • New Phytologist SI Template
    Supporting Information Article title: Pore constrictions in intervessel pit membranes reduce the risk of embolism spreading in angiosperm xylem Authors: Lucian Kaack, Matthias Weber, Emilie Isasa, Zohreh Karimi, Shan Li, Luciano Pereira, Christophe Trabi, Ya Zhang, H. Jochen Schenk, Bernhard Schuldt, Volker Schmidt, Steven Jansen The following Supporting Information is available for this article: Fig. S1 Frequency distribution of the number of intervessel pits per average vessel. Fig. S2 TEM images of intervessel pit membranes of different thickness. Fig. S3 Results of Model 1, Scenario 2; relation of TPM and pore constriction size. Fig. S4 Three-dimensional graph based on the risky scenario of Model 2, with 0.5 probability of having a large pore in a single pit membrane layer. Fig. S5 Two-dimensional graph based on Model 2 showing the probability of a large pore in a vessel of up 400,000 pits per vessel. Table S1 Dataset of the 31 angiosperm species studied, with reference to the anatomical and hydraulic traits measured. Methods S1 R script of Model 3 Methods S2 Protocols: plant material, xylem embolism resistance, transmission electron microscopy, vessel and pit dimensions Fig. S1 Frequency distribution of the number of intervessel pits per average vessel for 72 angiosperm tree species of 16 families, which varied asymmetrically from 510 to 370,755, and was calculated by dividing the total intervessel pit membrane area per vessel by the average area of intervessel pit membranes. Data are based on multiple data sets (Wheeler et al., 2005; Jansen et al., 2011; Lens et al., 2011; Nardini et al., 2012; Scholz et al., 2013; Klepsch et al., 2016; and original data).
    [Show full text]
  • Carpinus Caroliniana Family: Betulaceae American Hornbeam
    Carpinus caroliniana Family: Betulaceae American Hornbeam The genus Carpinus is represented by about 30 species that grow in the New World [1] and Eurasia [30]. Carpinus is the classical Latin name. Carpinus betulus: European Hornbeam—Avenbok, Carpe, Carpe Blanco, Carpen, Carpino Biannco, Charme, Charme Commun, Charme Comun, Charrlle, Charrlle Commun, Common Hornbeam, Dyed Hornbeam, Gemeine-weib-buche, Gem Weissbuche, Gewone Haagbeuk, Grab, Gyertyan, Haagbeuk, Habr Obecny, Hagabuche, Hage-buche, Hain-buche, Hojaranzo, Hornbaum, Hornbeam, Horn-buche, Steinbuch, Vitavenbok, Vit-bok, Weissbuche, Witch Elm Carpinus caroliniana: American Hornbeam—Blue Beech, Broomwood, Hophornbeam, Ironwood, Musclewood, O-tan-tahr-te-weh, Smoothbark Ironwood, Water Beech Carpinus carpinoides: Hornbeam, Kuma-shide Carpinus caucasia: Caucasian Hornbeam Carpinus cordata: Ggachibagdal, Russian Hornbeam, Sawashiba Carpinus distegocarpus: Kuma-shide Carpinus hebestroma: Taroko-sidi Carpinus japonica: Kuma-shide, Soya Carpinus laxiflora: Aka-shide, Hornbeam, Seo-namu, Soro Shide Carpinus orientalis: Oriental Hornbeam—Carpinella, Charme d’Orient, Eastern Hornbeam, Hojaranzo, Oosterse Haagbeuk, Orientalisk Avenbok Carpinus polyneura: Chinese Hornbeam Carpinus pubescens: Giau Do Carpinus rankanensis: Rankan-side Carpinus schuschaensis: Iran Hornbeam Carpinus seki: Taiwan-akashide Carpinus tschonoskii: Gaeseo-namu, Inu-shide, Korean Hornbeam Distribution North America, from central Maine to southern Quebec, southern Ontario, northern Iowa, Missouri, eastern Oklahoma and eastern Texas, east to central Florida. Northeastern Mexico (Tamaulipas) and from southern Mexico to Guatemala and Honduras. The Tree The American Hornbeam is a small tree that grows in mixed deciduous forests in the shade of taller hardwoods in bottom lands and river margins. It grows in association with oaks, sweetgum, hickories, maple and basswood. The tree grows slowly and is short lived.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B: Natural Heritage
    IBI GROUP BIRCH AVENUE: SCHEDULE B MUNICIPAL CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Prepared for City of Hamilton Appendix B: Natural Heritage Natural Heritage Report BIRCH AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS FROM BARTON STREET TO BURLINGTON STREET HAMILTON, ONTARIO prepared for: prepared by: JANUARY 2020 BIRCH AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS FROM BARTON STREET TO BURLINGTON STREET HAMILTON, ONTARIO NATURAL HERITAGE REPORT prepared by: Lisa Catcher Heather Polan Anna Jose Hons. B.A. M.Sc., R.P. Bio. M.Env.Sc. Botanist/ISA Certified Wildlife Biologist GIS Specialist Arborist reviewed by: Grant N. Kauffman, M.E.S. Vice President, Ontario Region LGL Limited environmental research associates 22 Fisher Street, P.O. Box 280 King City, Ontario CANADA L7B 1A6 Tel: (905) 833-1244 Fax: (905) 833-1255 Email: [email protected] URL: www.lgl.com JANUARY 2020 Birch Avenue Improvements from Barton Street to Burlington Street, Hamilton, Ontario Natural Heritage Report Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................... 3 2.1 PHYSIOGRAPHY, BEDROCK AND QUATERNARY GEOLOGY ..................................... 3 2.2 FISHERIES ......................................................................................................... 3 2.3 VEGETATION ..................................................................................................... 5 2.3.1 Purpose ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • LID Manual Cover-Color.Indd
    Puget Sound Action Team • Washington State University Pierce County Extension LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL GUIDANCE MANUAL FOR PUGET SOUND JANUARY 2005 P.O. Box 40900 3049 S. 36th St., Suite 300 Olympia, WA 98504-0900 Tacoma, WA 98409-5701 (360) 725-5444 / (800) 54-SOUND (253) 798-7180 www.psat.wa.gov www.pierce.wsu.edu Author: Curtis Hinman Project lead and editor: Bruce Wulkan Research assistant: Colleen Owen Design and layout: Toni Weyman Droscher Illustrations: AHBL Civil and Structural Engineers and Planners, except where noted Additional editorial assistance/proofreading: Harriet Beale and TC Christian Cover art, clockwise from top of page: Green street concept (AHBL). Vegetated roof, Multnomah County building in Portland, Oregon (Erica Guttman). Permeable concrete walkway and parking area, Whidbey Island (Greg McKinnon). Permeable paver detail (Gary Anderson). Bioretention swale, Seattle (Seattle Public Utilities). PIN pier section (Rick Gagliano). Publication No. PSAT 05-03 To obtain this publication in an alternative format, contact the Action Team’s ADA Coordinator at (360) 725-5444. The Action Team’s TDD number is (800) 833-6388. C Printed on recycled paper using vegetable-based inks. Representatives from the following groups serve on the Puget Sound Action Team: Local Government City of Burien, representing Puget Sound cities Whatcom County, representing Puget Sound counties Washington State Government, directors of the following agencies Community, Trade, and Economic Development Conservation Commission Department of Agriculture Department of Ecology Department of Fish & Wildlife Department of Health Department of Natural Resources Department of Transportation Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation Parks and Recreation Commission Tribal Government Tulalip Tribes, representing Puget Sound Tribes Federal Government (Ex-officio) NOAA Fisheries U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • (Carpinus Turczaninovii) Based on Nuclear Ribosomal ITS Sequence
    African Journal of Biotechnology Vol. 10(76), pp. 17435-17442, 30 November, 2011 Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJB DOI: 10.5897/AJB11.1337 ISSN 1684–5315 © 2011 Academic Journals Full Length Research Paper Phylogeny of Korean Hornbeam ( Carpinus turczaninovii ) based on nuclear ribosomal ITS sequence Sun, Y. L. 1, Wang, D. 1, Lee, H. B.2, Park, W. G. 2, Kwon, O. W. 3 and Hong, S. K.1,4 * 1Department of Bio-Health Technology, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Kangwon-Do, 200-701, Korea. 2Department of Forest Resources, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Kangwon-Do, 200-701, Korea. 3Korea Forest Seed and Variety Center, Suanbo, Chungju, Chungcheongbuk-Do, 380-941, Korea. 4Division of Biomedical Technology, College of Biomedical Science, Chuncheon, Kangwon-Do, 200-701, Korea. Accepted 25 July, 2011 The genus Carpinus belonging to Coryloideae, Betulaceae, has significant economic and ornamental importance. This study was undertaken with the aim to understand the genetic diversity among eighteen isolates of Carpinus turczaninovii collected from different geographical regions of Korea, using ribosomal RNA (rRNA) internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequences, to compare the infraspecific- phylogenetic relationships among C. turczaninovii in Korea, and some known Carpinus plants. The size variation of sequenced rRNA ITS regions was not seen, with 215, 162, 222 bp of ITS1 region, 5.8S rRNA gene, ITS2 region, respectively. However, some certain nucleotide variations resulted in genetic diversity. In the genus Carpinus , C. turczaninovii closely genetic with Castanopsis kawakamii , Carpinus orientalis , Carpinus monbeigiana , and Calyptranthes polynenra formed one monophyletic clade, while Carpinus betulus and Carpinus laxiflora, respectively formed one monophyletic clade.
    [Show full text]
  • A Critical Taxonomic Checklist of Carpinus and Ostrya (Coryloideae, Betulaceae)
    European Journal of Taxonomy 375: 1–52 ISSN 2118-9773 https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2017.375 www.europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu 2017 · Holstein N. & Weigend M. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Monograph No taxon left behind? – a critical taxonomic checklist of Carpinus and Ostrya (Coryloideae, Betulaceae) Norbert HOLSTEIN 1,* & Maximilian WEIGEND 2 1,2 Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany. * Corresponding author: [email protected] 2 Email: [email protected] Abstract. Hornbeams (Carpinus) and hop-hornbeams (Ostrya) are trees or large shrubs from the northern hemisphere. Currently, 43 species of Carpinus (58 taxa including subdivisions) and 8 species of Ostrya (9 taxa including sudivisions) are recognized. These are based on 175 (plus 16 Latin basionyms of cultivars) and 21 legitimate basionyms, respectively. We present an updated checklist with publication details and type information for all accepted names and the vast majority of synonyms of Carpinus and Ostrya, including the designation of 54 lectotypes and two neotypes. Cultivars are listed if validly described under the rules of the ICN. Furthermore, we consider Carpinus hwai Hu & W.C.Cheng to be a synonym of Carpinus fargesiana var. ovalifolia (H.J.P.Winkl.) Holstein & Weigend comb. nov. During the course of our work, we found 30 legitimate basionyms of non-cultivars that have been consistently overlooked since their original descriptions, when compared with the latest checklists and fl oristic treatments. As regional fl oras are highly important for taxonomic practice, we investigated the number of overlooked names and found that 78 basionyms were omitted at least once in the eight regional treatments surveyed.
    [Show full text]
  • Trees for Use in Tree Wells
    Business District Trees Trees for Tree Lawns; LARGE TREES (OVER 40’ IN TREE LAWNS OF AT LEAST 7’) – NO WIRES (Trees for use in Tree Wells) Other Applications •Betula nigra, River Birch •Celtis occidentalis, Hackberry SMALL TREES (UNDER 25’) SMALL TREES (UNDER 25’ IN TREE LAWNS OF AT LEAST 3’) •Cladrastis kentuckea, American Yellowwood •Carpinus betulus ‘Fastigata’, Upright European •Amelanchier arborea, Downy Serviceberry (single trunk) •Corylus colurna, Turkish Filbert Hornbeam •Amelanchier canadensis, Shadblow Serviceberry (single trunk) •Ginkgo biloba, Ginkgo or Maidenhair (male •Crataegus crusgalli var. inermis, Thornless Cockspur •Amelanchier x grandiflora, Apple Serviceberry (single trunk) selections only) Hawthorn •Amelanchier laevis, Allegheny Serviceberry (single trunk) •Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis, Thornless Common •Crataegus punctata var. inermis, ‘Ohio Pioneer’, •Carpinus japonica, Japanese Hornbeam Honeylocust Thornless Ohio Pioneer Hawthorn •Cercis canadensis, Eastern Redbud •Gymnocladus dioicus, Kentucky Coffeetree •Syringa reticulata, Japanese Tree Lilac •Cercis canadensis var. alba, White Eastern Redbud •Larix decidua, European Larch •Cornus kousa, Kousa Dogwood •Larix kaempferi, Japanese Larch •Cornus mas, ‘Golden Glory’ Corneliancherry Dog- •Liquidambar styraciflua, American Sweetgum wood •Magnolia acuminata, Cucumbertree •Crataegus x lavallei, Lavalle Hawthorn •Metasequoia glyptostroboides, Dawn Redwood •Crataegus phaenopyrum x Crataegus crusgalli ‘Vaughn’, •Platanus x acerfolia, London Planetree Vaughn Hawthorn
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Material
    Xiang et al., Page S1 Supporting Information Fig. S1. Examples of the diversity of diaspore shapes in Fagales. Fig. S2. Cladogram of Fagales obtained from the 5-marker data set. Fig. S3. Chronogram of Fagales obtained from analysis of the 5-marker data set in BEAST. Fig. S4. Time scale of major fagalean divergence events during the past 105 Ma. Fig. S5. Confidence intervals of expected clade diversity (log scale) according to age of stem group. Fig. S6. Evolution of diaspores types in Fagales with BiSSE model. Fig. S7. Evolution of diaspores types in Fagales with Mk1 model. Fig. S8. Evolution of dispersal modes in Fagales with MuSSE model. Fig. S9. Evolution of dispersal modes in Fagales with Mk1 model. Fig. S10. Reconstruction of pollination syndromes in Fagales with BiSSE model. Fig. S11. Reconstruction of pollination syndromes in Fagales with Mk1 model. Fig. S12. Reconstruction of habitat shifts in Fagales with MuSSE model. Fig. S13. Reconstruction of habitat shifts in Fagales with Mk1 model. Fig. S14. Stratigraphy of fossil fagalean genera. Table S1 Genera of Fagales indicating the number of recognized and sampled species, nut sizes, habits, pollination modes, and geographic distributions. Table S2 List of taxa included in this study, sources of plant material, and GenBank accession numbers. Table S3 Primers used for amplification and sequencing in this study. Table S4 Fossil age constraints utilized in this study of Fagales diversification. Table S5 Fossil fruits reviewed in this study. Xiang et al., Page S2 Table S6 Statistics from the analyses of the various data sets. Table S7 Estimated ages for all families and genera of Fagales using BEAST.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound
    Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound December 2012 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Low Impact Development Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound December 2012 WSU Puyallup Research 326 East D Street & Extension Center Tacoma, WA 98421 2606 West Pioneer 360.464.1232 Puyallup, WA 98371 [email protected] www.pierce.wsu.edu Author and project co-lead: Curtis Hinman, Washington State University Extension Faculty Project co-lead: Bruce Wulkan, Puget Sound Partnership Design and layout: AHBL Illustrations: AHBL (except where noted) Research, facilitation and external review: VEDA Consulting Publication No. PSP 2012-3 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Acknowledgements Technical Advisory Committee Bruce Barker MGS Catherine Benotto Webber Thompson Mark Buehrer 2020 Engineers Art Castle Building Industry Association of WA Rich Geiger Mason Conservation District Kathy Gwilym SvR Design Kas Kinkead Cascade Design Collaborative Tim Kurtz City of Portland Alice Lancaster Herrera Chris May Kitsap County David McDonald City of Seattle Matt Miller Associated Earth Sciences Ed O’Brien Department of Ecology Tracy Tackett City of Seattle Bruce Wulkan Puget Sound Partnership Craig Young Snohomish County Contributors Michael Bledsoe Pervious Concrete Inc. Patrick Carey Hadj Designs Jeff Cox Triad Associates Drena Donofrio Seattle Public Utilities Rick Gagliano PIN Foundations Erica Guttman Washington State University Extension Robin Kirschbaum HDR Andy Marks Puget Sound Concrete Specification Council David McDonald Seattle Public Utilities Ed O’Brien Department of Ecology Robert Pine Pine and Swallow Environmental David Smith Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute Paul Thompson Urban Forestry Services, Inc. Brian Taylor AMEC Funding Portions of this project were produced with support from the Puget Sound Partnership.
    [Show full text]